Referendums are difficult to get up due to the endogeneity of response. [ How the question is framed]Originally Posted by MFKS
Referendums are difficult to get up due to the endogeneity of response. [ How the question is framed]
Exactly.
The '99 referendums biggest problem was that although polling showed a good % of people didn't want a foreign head of state, the alternative (or lack thereof) scared people off.
The republicans did a horseshit job of explaining how they could come up with an impartial figure who essentially had to hold the govt to account.
The pollies were pretty much all like "yeah just vote it in and we'll sort out the detail later".
Having pollies 'sort out detail' in the best interests of the nation was something that Joe Public wasn't silly enough to fall for.
When it came down to a choice between the incumbent or someone like Shane Warne, Alan Joyce or Paul Howes, the public was happy to keep the status quo.
Pretty sure back then that Ray Martin polled highest in that regard.
And there you go.
Bloke isn't impartial, may as well have had Alan Jones.
That was the problem with the whole campaign.
Unlike any other nation? Not sure this is true.
I'm sure there are plenty of counties where government power is as decentralised or even more so than ours.
The US is the most obvious one that comes to mind, as well as Spain.
In the US state law can trump federal law. It's why Obama had to direct the DEA not to interfere with Colorado's yarndi laws.
why would god give birth to himself only to kill himself just to forgive for some sins that i didn't commit anyway (and neither did you, or anyone)
couldn't the omnipotent **** have forgiven without the bullshit convoluted process? talk about ****ing wasteful
p.s. yes i have been drinking
we will loose
I love drunk snake
GF party this year at slobsys
we will loose
So Malcom Fraser hey.
Didn't seem to have many mates.
Although the hippies started liking him after he went full Red Wedding on the Libs.
I liked Fraser
then again I like sensible, decent politicians who put facts ahead of ideology and are socially progressive and financially conservative
yeah he was before my time but from what I read was very vocal on indigenous rights as well as being at the forefront of the anti apartheid movement.
Can't fault that.
I guess people didn't like the fact he was a conservative who came from a fairly well off family.
and of course for his part in the Whitlam dismissal, in which by all accounts he was a bit of a ****
need a dd soon, but cosgrove ismtoo much of an insipid mutt to call it
we will loose
I really liked Mal in his later years, and I think he came to realise that being Lib or Lab really means fukall, just do the right thing.
book sales and the collection plate are pretty important apparently.
Anyone able to give a bit of a summary on each of the homies running for Lake Mac in the state election? Who is doing what that is good or bad?
I listened to a few interviews that ABC radio did, and Greg Piper the independent seemed the most down to earth. If I don't bother to track down or be given a decent summary of which issues all of them do or don't subscribe to, I'll probably vote for Piper.
OK
Took part in the ABC's Vote Compass tool for the first time ever. Turns out, I align mostly with the Greens on individual policies. Not by a great margin over Labor, but still I think I might vote Greens this weekend.
Cue cynical jibes about throwing my vote away and preferences etc.
Haha, you can type in that thing that you hate the blacks and Jews and it will still tell you to vote Green.
It's the ABC FFS.
Legit though, vote however you want but you are essentially voting Labor if you vote Greens. Most people are cool with that.
Same as you are voting for Libs if you're voting Nationals out bush way.
They're all pretty much ****s tho.
My voting compass:
OK
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote